That was the conclusion given to SHAN by a veteran Karen fighter, who
was re-elected to the 45 member Central Committee of the Karen National
Union (KNU) last December despite his long standing relationship with
the so-called “hardliners,” most of whom were voted out by the 3 week
congress held near the Thai-Burmese border.

The congress, held every 4 years, was a “very democratic and fair”
affair, according to him. “But this was the first time such a polarized
election for the central committee was held,” he said. “In previous
congresses, election was based more on experience and capacity than on
ideological stance.”

By contrast, the 2012 congress was clearly a struggle between those
leaders who believe that ceasefire and peace negotiations should be
carried out swiftly and boldly, and those who want a slower, cautious
approach. (He refused to use the labels “pragmatists” and “hardliners”
as designated by some members and supporters.)

The Big 5 of KNU (Photo: karennews.org)

“Only people seen as very competent and not too closely attached to
the previous leadership (what he terms the cautious ones), clearly
independent or neutral were elected,” he said.

“The new leadership will be judged for its performance (in the peace
process),” he replied to SHAN’s query. “Everyone knows the ceasefire is
only a preliminary step to prepare for political negotiations. There is
still a lot of struggles ahead.”

The source is a firm believer that at least until a lasting political
settlement is reached, the Karens have to preserve both its political
and military establishments. “A process where we are not allowed to
strengthen our military as a counter balance to the Tatmadaw’s steady
build up is the principal danger to the peace process,” he told SHAN.
“Our leaders must be aware of such dangers.”

The key to a lasting political settlement, he maintains, is the
review of the 2008 constitution and the acceptance of the federal
system.

Unlike other Karen leaders, he does not place particular emphasis on
what is known as the Burmese sincerity. “In politics, you don’t think
about sincerity,” he said. “You only think about your ability to fend
for yourself. Rights and freedom are not given because they are just
causes, but because those in power are obliged to concede them out of
necessity.”